Dataset Information

Forecasted Size of Measles Outbreaks Associated With Vaccination Exemptions for Schoolchildren.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Vaccine exemptions, which allow unvaccinated children to attend school, have increased by a factor of 28 since 2003 in Texas. Geographic clustering of unvaccinated children facilitates the spread of measles introductions, but the potential size of outbreaks is unclear.

Objective

To forecast the range of measles outbreak sizes in each metropolitan area of Texas at 2018 and future reduced school vaccination rates.

Design, setting, and participants

An agent-based decision analytical model using a synthetic population of Texas, derived from the 2010 US Census, was used to simulate measles transmission in the Texas population. Real schools were represented in the simulations, and the 2018 vaccination rate of each real school was applied to a simulated hypothetical equivalent. Single cases of measles were introduced, daily activities and interactions were modeled for each population member, and the number of infections over the course of 9 months was counted for 1000 simulated runs in each Texas metropolitan area.

Interventions

To determine the outcomes of further decreases in vaccination coverage, additional simulations were performed with vaccination rates reduced by 1% to 10% in schools with populations that are currently undervaccinated.

Main outcomes and measures

Expected distributions of outbreak sizes in each metropolitan area of Texas at 2018 and reduced vaccination rates.

Results

At 2018 vaccination rates, the median number of cases in large metropolitan areas was typically small, ranging from 1 to 3 cases, which is consistent with outbreaks in Texas 2006 to 2017. However, the upper limit of the distribution of plausible outbreaks (the 95th percentile, associated with 1 in 20 measles introductions) exceeded 400 cases in both the Austin and Dallas metropolitan areas, similar to the largest US outbreaks since measles was eliminated in 2000. Decreases in vaccination rates in schools with undervaccinated populations in 2018 were associated with exponential increases in the potential size of outbreaks: a 5% decrease in vaccination rate was associated with a 40% to 4000% increase in potential outbreak size, depending on the metropolitan area. A mean (SD) of 64% (11%) of cases occurred in students for whom a vaccine had been refused, but a mean (SD) of 36% (11%) occurred in others (ie, bystanders).

Conclusions and relevance

This study suggests that vaccination rates in some Texas schools are currently low enough to allow large measles outbreaks. Further decreases are associated with dramatic increases in the probability of large outbreaks. Limiting vaccine exemptions could be associated with a decrease in the risk of large measles outbreaks.

SUBMITTER: Sinclair DR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6707017 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunities with low vaccination rates are at greater risk during outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases. Most Australian parents support vaccines, but some refuse and are often judged harshly by their community, especially during an outbreak. We sought the perspectives of Australian public health experts on the key issues faced when managing a measles outbreak in an area with high anti-vaccination sentiment.MethodsA measles outbreak scenario formed the basis of a 3-round modified Delphi process to identify key practitioner concerns in relation to parents/carers who don't follow the recommended vaccination schedule. We surveyed a range of professionals in the field: policymakers, infectious disease experts, immunisation program staff, and others involved in delivering childhood vaccinations, to identify key priorities when responding to an outbreak in a community with low vaccination coverage.ResultsFindings indicate that responses to measles outbreaks in communities with high anti-vaccination sentiment are motivated by concerns about the potential for a much larger outbreak event. The highest operational priority is to isolate infected children. The two most highly ranked practical issues are mistrust from non-vaccinating members of the local region and combatting misinformation about vaccines. Trying to change minds of such individuals is not a priority during an outbreak, nor is vaccinating their children. Using media and social media to provide information about the outbreak and measures the public can take to limit the spread of the disease was a focus.ConclusionsOur findings provide a deeper understanding of the challenges faced during an outbreak and priorities for communicating with communities where there is a high level of anti-vaccination sentiment. In the context of a global pandemic, the results of this study also have implications for managing public health responses to community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, as COVID-19 vaccines becomes widely available.

Project description:BackgroundRoutine vaccination supplemented by planned campaigns occurring at 2-5 y intervals is the core of current measles control and elimination efforts. Yet, large, unexpected outbreaks still occur, even when control measures appear effective. Supplementing these activities with mass vaccination campaigns triggered when low levels of measles immunity are observed in a sample of the population (i.e., serosurveys) or incident measles cases occur may provide a way to limit the size of outbreaks.Methods and findingsMeasles incidence was simulated using stochastic age-structured epidemic models in settings conducive to high or low measles incidence, roughly reflecting demographic contexts and measles vaccination coverage of four heterogeneous countries: Nepal, Niger, Yemen, and Zambia. Uncertainty in underlying vaccination rates was modeled. Scenarios with case- or serosurvey-triggered campaigns reaching 20% of the susceptible population were compared to scenarios without triggered campaigns. The best performing of the tested case-triggered campaigns prevent an average of 28,613 (95% CI 25,722-31,505) cases over 15 y in our highest incidence setting and 599 (95% CI 464-735) cases in the lowest incidence setting. Serosurvey-triggered campaigns can prevent 89,173 (95% CI, 86,768-91,577) and 744 (612-876) cases, respectively, but are triggered yearly in high-incidence settings. Triggered campaigns reduce the highest cumulative incidence seen in simulations by up to 80%. While the scenarios considered in this strategic modeling exercise are reflective of real populations, the exact quantitative interpretation of the results is limited by the simplifications in country structure, vaccination policy, and surveillance system performance. Careful investigation into the cost-effectiveness in different contexts would be essential before moving forward with implementation.ConclusionsSerologically triggered campaigns could help prevent severe epidemics in the face of epidemiological and vaccination uncertainty. Hence, small-scale serology may serve as the basis for effective adaptive public health strategies, although, in high-incidence settings, case-triggered approaches are likely more efficient.

Project description:Influenza viruses are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Vaccination remains a powerful tool for preventing or mitigating influenza outbreaks. Yet, vaccine supplies and daily administration capacities are limited, even in developed countries. Understanding how such constraints can alter the mitigating effects of vaccination is a crucial part of influenza preparedness plans. Mathematical models provide tools for government and medical officials to assess the impact of different vaccination strategies and plan accordingly. However, many existing models of vaccination employ several questionable assumptions, including a rate of vaccination proportional to the population at each point in time.We present a SIR-like model that explicitly takes into account vaccine supply and the number of vaccines administered per day and places data-informed limits on these parameters. We refer to this as the non-proportional model of vaccination and compare it to the proportional scheme typically found in the literature.The proportional and non-proportional models behave similarly for a few different vaccination scenarios. However, there are parameter regimes involving the vaccination campaign duration and daily supply limit for which the non-proportional model predicts smaller epidemics that peak later, but may last longer, than those of the proportional model. We also use the non-proportional model to predict the mitigating effects of variably timed vaccination campaigns for different levels of vaccination coverage, using specific constraints on daily administration capacity.The non-proportional model of vaccination is a theoretical improvement that provides more accurate predictions of the mitigating effects of vaccination on influenza outbreaks than the proportional model. In addition, parameters such as vaccine supply and daily administration limit can be easily adjusted to simulate conditions in developed and developing nations with a wide variety of financial and medical resources. Finally, the model can be used by government and medical officials to create customized pandemic preparedness plans based on the supply and administration constraints of specific communities.